10.07.2015 Views

Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

Seminar XXIV Final Sessions 1 - Lacan in Ireland

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Everyone knows that this is how th<strong>in</strong>gs will present themselves and that theSymbolic seen from the outside as torus, will f<strong>in</strong>d itself, with respect to theImag<strong>in</strong>ary and the Real, will f<strong>in</strong>d itself hav<strong>in</strong>g to pass above this one whichis above and below this one which is below. But what do we see byproceed<strong>in</strong>g as we usually do by a cut, by a split to turn the Symbolic <strong>in</strong>sideout? This Symbolic turned <strong>in</strong>side out <strong>in</strong> this way,...here is what theSymbolic turned <strong>in</strong>side out <strong>in</strong> this way will give: it will give a completelydifferent arrangement of what I called the Borromean knot, namely, that theSymbolic will totally envelop, by turn<strong>in</strong>g the symbolic torus <strong>in</strong>side out, willtotally envelop the Imag<strong>in</strong>ary and the Real. This <strong>in</strong>deed is why the use ofthe cut with respect to what is <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> the Symbolic presents someth<strong>in</strong>gwhich risks <strong>in</strong> short, at the end of a psychoanalysis, of provok<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>gwhich might be specified as a preference given above all to the unconscious.I mean that, if th<strong>in</strong>gs are such that th<strong>in</strong>gs are go<strong>in</strong>g a bit better like that asregards the life of each one, namely, to put the accent on this function, thisfunction of the knowledge of the une-bévue by which I translated theunconscious, th<strong>in</strong>gs can effectively be better organised. But it is all thesame a structure of an essentially different nature to the one that I qualifiedas Borromean knot. The fact that the Imag<strong>in</strong>ary and the Real should beentirely <strong>in</strong>cluded, <strong>in</strong> short, <strong>in</strong> someth<strong>in</strong>g which has come from the practiceof psychoanalysis itself, is someth<strong>in</strong>g which gives rise to a question. Thereis here, all the same, a problem. I repeat, this is l<strong>in</strong>ked to the fact that it isnot when all is said and done the same th<strong>in</strong>g, the structure of the Borromeanknot and what you will see there. Someone who has experienced apsychoanalysis is someth<strong>in</strong>g which marks a passage, which marks apassage, – of course this presupposes that my analysis of the unconsciousqua found<strong>in</strong>g the function of the Symbolic is completely acceptable. It isnevertheless a fact, the fact is apparently, and I can confirm it, apparentlythe fact of hav<strong>in</strong>g gone through an analysis is someth<strong>in</strong>g which cannot be <strong>in</strong>any case restored to the previous state, except of course by carry<strong>in</strong>g out23

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!